Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Great to see someone else already knows what I'm going to do, and is worried enough about their own chances to have a pop before I've even published a manifesto or started any campaigning. Must be doing something right.

 

I'm not quite sure where you would get that belief from? I'm not standing and I'm not linked to anyone who is standing either. I've just been reading a lot of the stuff you post on Facebook and have done my own research and basically think what you're talking about is a load of absolute tosh. That's all. I'm not sure why you would want to pretend that I'm some worried candidate like it suddenly makes what you're proposing sound so important.

 

How do you propose to fill in 96% of your time once you're in on the basis that with the Swiss model only 4% of legislation actually ends up being out to referendum? You have said you're not interested in really being an MHK so that's a lot of time to fill in on £45k a year just running a website. That Swiss 4% is after the system has been set up too. At the moment there is no Swiss style direct democratic system and there are no other direct democracy candidates. There is also no requirement for anything to go to referendum at all (except the polls you put on your website which have no valid legal status) so are you going to sit there twiddling your thumbs on £45k a year waiting for the island to catch up with this idea for the next 10 or 15 years?

Edited by JackCarter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 724
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've said it before and I'll say it again... Skelly as CM would be the terminal breath of credible politics in the Isle of Man.

Shut up.

I hope he gets in if only to piss you off. Which it clearly would.

 

Great to see someone else already knows what I'm going to do, and is worried enough about their own chances to have a pop before I've even published a manifesto or started any campaigning. Must be doing something right.

 

I'm not quite sure where you would get that belief from? I'm not standing and I'm not linked to anyone who is standing either. I've just been reading a lot of the stuff you post on Facebook and have done my own research and basically think what you're talking about is a load of absolute tosh. That's all. I'm not sure why you would want to pretend that I'm some worried candidate like it suddenly makes what you're proposing sound so important.

 

How do you propose to fill in 96% of your time once you're in on the basis that with the Swiss model only 4% of legislation actually ends up being out to referendum? You have said you're not interested in really being an MHK so that's a lot of time to fill in on £45k a year just running a website. That Swiss 4% is after the system has been set up too. At the moment there is no Swiss style direct democratic system and there are no other direct democracy candidates. There is also no requirement for anything to go to referendum at all (except the polls you put on your website which have no valid legal status) so are you going to sit there twiddling your thumbs on £45k a year waiting for the island to catch up with this idea for the next 10 or 15 years?

 

 

 

Apologies mucka. It seems to be standard MF policy to assume when someone starts up a new account simply to post on one subject that person must be either an MHK or candidate who stands to loose, or another account holder who doesn't want to be connected with the new line of inquiry. Doesn't make any sense to me either as none of the accounts are verified as far as I'm aware (there's no way of knowing if this actually me typing this), but it seems to add to the fun.

 

As to what I intend to actually do for my pay, this will be covered in more detail in my manifesto. The short version is I intended to make as big a push as possible to get people to engage with having a say in a new policy direction after the election, principally in electing a new chief minister and putting together a program for government (even if I have to do that on my own). If people don't engage in significant enough numbers to make this happen I will just have to keep plugging away on any issue I feel will generate public interest. If people do engage I will then have to spend time ensuring the program for government is being followed (in the usual way for an MHK) and ask the public to assist me if I or they feel it isn't. It's not the Californian model, it's not the Swiss model, it'll be the Manx Model for now. I've given a lot more detail on where I think it could go from here (and would be best going) in my submission to Lord Lisvane.

 

...and I won't be taking a pension, and I won't be taking any department uplift beyond the work I actually do. My relatively modest income from my business (which could have been much greater given the size of the turnover vs. size of business) is I feel a reflection of the fact that I've always been more concerned with the stability of the business and the quality of the product, rather than the profit. It could be why I never missed a staff payday, why we've never struggled for work and still have years of potential projects on hand (despite starting in 2008 when the economic downturn kicked off, and having seen many established firms go in that time), and why we have 8 years worth of beautiful work behind us (of which I am very proud).

 

TTFN.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted in this subject first as I had read a lot on your FB page and did my own research to test the theories as it was a bit controversial. I'm being honest in saying that I don't believe any of it one bit. I also have a real problem with Manx demographics and basically all I can see this doing is handing the complete control of the Manx political system over to the biggest demographic; which is people who work for government, their families, government pensioners and anyone with a beneficial or financial interest in the Isle of Man Government. As I have already says turkeys don't vote for Xmas; as its been proven in California over tax increases that simply cannot be enacted as nobody ever votes for a tax increase. The public sector dependent demographic here turns the tables completely and I think that is not only abhorrent but dangerous as that group is our biggest problem when it comes to sustainability. I think anyone who works in the private sector should be very worried that they would effectively become a minority group that is completely disenfranchised despite the fact they are the biggest income driving group. We wouldn't get any changes to employment terms, or benefits and pensions no matter how sensible those changes might be in creating sustainability as that demographic simply would not vote for it.

 

As for not taking salaries etc I always think that's just a sop to get votes to be honest whenever I've heard it before. There are people who have said they will give salaries to charity in the past and all sorts of other stuff. It's only trying to make yourself good against the others which is a relatively cheap trick. I know it's well intentioned but essentially this thing could take years to take off and your going to be paid £45k a year throughout all those years for running a website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

 

It's a complete slackers charter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

 

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

 

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

 

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

 

You've not thought this through.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

 

You've not thought this through.

In what way are you being trolled? I think my opening post was very clear that I have read a lot of what you have posted on various sites. I have looked into various things and I think, on balance, a lot of what you offer sounds like codswallop. I also provided links to various articles on the deficiencies of direct democracy in California. That's not really trolling; it's expressing a view. Although I'm not expecting you to agree with that view I was expecting a lot more substance to your replies.

 

To reiterate what I have said is

 

* Direct democracy has been said to be a key factor in the almost bankruptcy of the State of California

 

* Its been proven in California that people don't vote for unpopular things like tax increases even where desperately needed to re-balance the economy

 

* It has also been proven in the Californian state employees pension system that Direct Democracy is actively blocking much needed reform and is thereby possibly bankrupting the State even quicker

 

* California is just piling on debt and pension liabilities because nobody will vote for policies that are deemed economically essential but unpopular

 

* Recalls are even stopping any chance of reform as the public actively sacks anyone who might seek to actually implement economic policies that are needed but are unpopular

 

* I have serious doubts over the Manx demographic which centres around the wider public sector too heavily

 

* On this basis I think what you're proposing is dangerous and disenfranchising to anyone who wants to see reform in the public sector in order to achieve a sustainable economy

 

* I don't believe you are offering anything personally but sound bites and inaction for the salary of £45k a year. That applies equally to some other candidates.

 

* Direct Democracy may never even come in so you might spend 15 years being paid to deliver nothing tangible

 

* Offering to rebate parts of MHK remuneration, in my view, tacitly admits that you probably know that fact

 

* Even if it did come in Switzerland ends up with only 4% of legislation going to referendum

 

That is all.

Edited by JackCarter
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Manx nationalist, I'm firmly of the belief that Phil Gawne is a turncoat "Uncle Tom" asshole. On FB he replies to or likes any post positive about him, but if anyone asks him any questions that might reveal what a useless bell ended he is, he ignores them. The guy is a sell out.

 

Some Manx nationalist you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted in this subject first as I had read a lot on your FB page and did my own research to test the theories as it was a bit controversial. I'm being honest in saying that I don't believe any of it one bit. I also have a real problem with Manx demographics and basically all I can see this doing is handing the complete control of the Manx political system over to the biggest demographic; which is people who work for government, their families, government pensioners and anyone with a beneficial or financial interest in the Isle of Man Government. As I have already says turkeys don't vote for Xmas; as its been proven in California over tax increases that simply cannot be enacted as nobody ever votes for a tax increase. The public sector dependent demographic here turns the tables completely and I think that is not only abhorrent but dangerous as that group is our biggest problem when it comes to sustainability. I think anyone who works in the private sector should be very worried that they would effectively become a minority group that is completely disenfranchised despite the fact they are the biggest income driving group. We wouldn't get any changes to employment terms, or benefits and pensions no matter how sensible those changes might be in creating sustainability as that demographic simply would not vote for it.

 

As for not taking salaries etc I always think that's just a sop to get votes to be honest whenever I've heard it before. There are people who have said they will give salaries to charity in the past and all sorts of other stuff. It's only trying to make yourself good against the others which is a relatively cheap trick. I know it's well intentioned but essentially this thing could take years to take off and your going to be paid £45k a year throughout all those years for running a website.

 

Time to change the demographic of the majority working for the government

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

 

You've not thought this through.

In what way are you being trolled? I think my opening post was very clear that I have read a lot of what you have posted on various sites. I have looked into various things and I think, on balance, a lot of what you offer sounds like codswallop. I also provided links to various articles on the deficiencies of direct democracy in California. That's not really trolling; it's expressing a view. Although I'm not expecting you to agree with that view I was expecting a lot more substance to your replies.

 

To reiterate what I have said is

 

* Direct democracy has been said to be a key factor in the almost bankruptcy of the State of California

 

* Its been proven in California that people don't vote for unpopular things like tax increases even where desperately needed to re-balance the economy

 

* It has also been proven in the Californian state employees pension system that Direct Democracy is actively blocking much needed reform and is thereby possibly bankrupting the State even quicker

 

* California is just piling on debt and pension liabilities because nobody will vote for policies that are deemed economically essential but unpopular

 

* Recalls are even stopping any chance of reform as the public actively sacks anyone who might seek to actually implement economic policies that are needed but are unpopular

 

* I have serious doubts over the Manx demographic which centres around the wider public sector too heavily

 

* On this basis I think what you're proposing is dangerous and disenfranchising to anyone who wants to see reform in the public sector in order to achieve a sustainable economy

 

* I don't believe you are offering anything personally but sound bites and inaction for the salary of £45k a year. That applies equally to some other candidates.

 

* Direct Democracy may never even come in so you might spend 15 years being paid to deliver nothing tangible

 

* Offering to rebate parts of MHK remuneration, in my view, tacitly admits that you probably know that fact

 

* Even if it did come in Switzerland ends up with only 4% of legislation going to referendum

 

That is all.

You have completely ignored the two points I asked you about, which made me assume you were trolling. Therefore, you are trolling. If you answer them I'm happy to explain why you are wrong, and even debate your ideas for change and why they are wrong. Until then, happy trolling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I posted in this subject first as I had read a lot on your FB page and did my own research to test the theories as it was a bit controversial. I'm being honest in saying that I don't believe any of it one bit. I also have a real problem with Manx demographics and basically all I can see this doing is handing the complete control of the Manx political system over to the biggest demographic; which is people who work for government, their families, government pensioners and anyone with a beneficial or financial interest in the Isle of Man Government. As I have already says turkeys don't vote for Xmas; as its been proven in California over tax increases that simply cannot be enacted as nobody ever votes for a tax increase. The public sector dependent demographic here turns the tables completely and I think that is not only abhorrent but dangerous as that group is our biggest problem when it comes to sustainability. I think anyone who works in the private sector should be very worried that they would effectively become a minority group that is completely disenfranchised despite the fact they are the biggest income driving group. We wouldn't get any changes to employment terms, or benefits and pensions no matter how sensible those changes might be in creating sustainability as that demographic simply would not vote for it.

As for not taking salaries etc I always think that's just a sop to get votes to be honest whenever I've heard it before. There are people who have said they will give salaries to charity in the past and all sorts of other stuff. It's only trying to make yourself good against the others which is a relatively cheap trick. I know it's well intentioned but essentially this thing could take years to take off and your going to be paid £45k a year throughout all those years for running a website.

 

Time to change the demographic of the majority working for the government

That is the biggest flaw in this though. It's the way the Manx economy has operated forever. There is no way a direct democracy could ever deliver effective reform when 60% of the people it's asking to drive policy are people or families who would be adversely affected by that change in policy. No different to California and tax increases. It's a fatal flaw for me and I think the concept is simply abhorrent whilst our economy is structured the way it is. We'd end up more unsustainable than we are already rather than less. Especially in respect of the government pension scheme; 20% of the working population are in it, and there's about 5-7,000 retirees as well (all with spouses, children etc indirectly dependent as well). Nothing would ever happen as the majority of people you would be asking to approve any changes would never vote for them.

Edited by JackCarter
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

You've not thought this through.

In what way are you being trolled? I think my opening post was very clear that I have read a lot of what you have posted on various sites. I have looked into various things and I think, on balance, a lot of what you offer sounds like codswallop. I also provided links to various articles on the deficiencies of direct democracy in California. That's not really trolling; it's expressing a view. Although I'm not expecting you to agree with that view I was expecting a lot more substance to your replies.

To reiterate what I have said is

* Direct democracy has been said to be a key factor in the almost bankruptcy of the State of California

* Its been proven in California that people don't vote for unpopular things like tax increases even where desperately needed to re-balance the economy

* It has also been proven in the Californian state employees pension system that Direct Democracy is actively blocking much needed reform and is thereby possibly bankrupting the State even quicker

* California is just piling on debt and pension liabilities because nobody will vote for policies that are deemed economically essential but unpopular

* Recalls are even stopping any chance of reform as the public actively sacks anyone who might seek to actually implement economic policies that are needed but are unpopular

* I have serious doubts over the Manx demographic which centres around the wider public sector too heavily

* On this basis I think what you're proposing is dangerous and disenfranchising to anyone who wants to see reform in the public sector in order to achieve a sustainable economy

* I don't believe you are offering anything personally but sound bites and inaction for the salary of £45k a year. That applies equally to some other candidates.

* Direct Democracy may never even come in so you might spend 15 years being paid to deliver nothing tangible

* Offering to rebate parts of MHK remuneration, in my view, tacitly admits that you probably know that fact

* Even if it did come in Switzerland ends up with only 4% of legislation going to referendum

That is all.

You have completely ignored the two points I asked you about, which made me assume you were trolling. Therefore, you are trolling. If you answer them I'm happy to explain why you are wrong, and even debate your ideas for change and why they are wrong. Until then, happy trolling.

That's not an answer. It's very easy to accuse people of trolling when you don't want to provide an answer. What will happen in your online democracy? Will anyone who disagrees and puts up a reasonable reason why they disagree with you be accused of trolling and ignored?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

You've not thought this through.

In what way are you being trolled? I think my opening post was very clear that I have read a lot of what you have posted on various sites. I have looked into various things and I think, on balance, a lot of what you offer sounds like codswallop. I also provided links to various articles on the deficiencies of direct democracy in California. That's not really trolling; it's expressing a view. Although I'm not expecting you to agree with that view I was expecting a lot more substance to your replies.

To reiterate what I have said is

* Direct democracy has been said to be a key factor in the almost bankruptcy of the State of California

* Its been proven in California that people don't vote for unpopular things like tax increases even where desperately needed to re-balance the economy

* It has also been proven in the Californian state employees pension system that Direct Democracy is actively blocking much needed reform and is thereby possibly bankrupting the State even quicker

* California is just piling on debt and pension liabilities because nobody will vote for policies that are deemed economically essential but unpopular

* Recalls are even stopping any chance of reform as the public actively sacks anyone who might seek to actually implement economic policies that are needed but are unpopular

* I have serious doubts over the Manx demographic which centres around the wider public sector too heavily

* On this basis I think what you're proposing is dangerous and disenfranchising to anyone who wants to see reform in the public sector in order to achieve a sustainable economy

* I don't believe you are offering anything personally but sound bites and inaction for the salary of £45k a year. That applies equally to some other candidates.

* Direct Democracy may never even come in so you might spend 15 years being paid to deliver nothing tangible

* Offering to rebate parts of MHK remuneration, in my view, tacitly admits that you probably know that fact

* Even if it did come in Switzerland ends up with only 4% of legislation going to referendum

That is all.

You have completely ignored the two points I asked you about, which made me assume you were trolling. Therefore, you are trolling. If you answer them I'm happy to explain why you are wrong, and even debate your ideas for change and why they are wrong. Until then, happy trolling.
That's not an answer. It's very easy to accuse people of trolling when you don't want to provide an answer. What will happen in your online democracy? Will anyone who disagrees and puts up a reasonable reason why they disagree with you be accused of trolling and ignored?

And you still haven't answered my questions.

 

You've made a couple of false statements about things I've said. Until you prove them or retract them you're a troll.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

^you have issue with the possibility of Hampton earning a salary for counting votes and running a website. The present 24 incumbents have been stealing of the taxpayer for far too long and all of them are incapable of running a bath.

Lots of them do time on committees, working groups, then working on policy in Ministeries etc. As I read the website James Hampton believes his role to be largely passive. That's a lot of sitting around waiting to be told what to do by other people. If you extend that out even if a Swiss style model came in 96% of all legislation would be passed without a referendum being called anyway so a lot of judgement would be called to be exercised by an MHK in Keys and as I read it he doesn't see his role as being one to exercise judgement on behalf of other people.

It's a complete slackers charter.

I've been reprimanded on here before for engaging with trolls, so if you can answer these two points I'll assume you are actually interested and not just out for sport.

If you've actually read what I've written please post a link or screen shot from wherever I said I would be passive. I don't think anyone who knew me would call my approach to anything passive. Cocky and full of shit maybe, but passive? No.

Again if you'd actually read what I've written you'd know that I've committed to publishing a time sheet of what I've actually done for the public and only taking pay for that. So if I don't do anything I'm not going to get paid am I?

You've not thought this through.

In what way are you being trolled? I think my opening post was very clear that I have read a lot of what you have posted on various sites. I have looked into various things and I think, on balance, a lot of what you offer sounds like codswallop. I also provided links to various articles on the deficiencies of direct democracy in California. That's not really trolling; it's expressing a view. Although I'm not expecting you to agree with that view I was expecting a lot more substance to your replies.

To reiterate what I have said is

* Direct democracy has been said to be a key factor in the almost bankruptcy of the State of California

* Its been proven in California that people don't vote for unpopular things like tax increases even where desperately needed to re-balance the economy

* It has also been proven in the Californian state employees pension system that Direct Democracy is actively blocking much needed reform and is thereby possibly bankrupting the State even quicker

* California is just piling on debt and pension liabilities because nobody will vote for policies that are deemed economically essential but unpopular

* Recalls are even stopping any chance of reform as the public actively sacks anyone who might seek to actually implement economic policies that are needed but are unpopular

* I have serious doubts over the Manx demographic which centres around the wider public sector too heavily

* On this basis I think what you're proposing is dangerous and disenfranchising to anyone who wants to see reform in the public sector in order to achieve a sustainable economy

* I don't believe you are offering anything personally but sound bites and inaction for the salary of £45k a year. That applies equally to some other candidates.

* Direct Democracy may never even come in so you might spend 15 years being paid to deliver nothing tangible

* Offering to rebate parts of MHK remuneration, in my view, tacitly admits that you probably know that fact

* Even if it did come in Switzerland ends up with only 4% of legislation going to referendum

That is all.

You have completely ignored the two points I asked you about, which made me assume you were trolling. Therefore, you are trolling. If you answer them I'm happy to explain why you are wrong, and even debate your ideas for change and why they are wrong. Until then, happy trolling.
That's not an answer. It's very easy to accuse people of trolling when you don't want to provide an answer. What will happen in your online democracy? Will anyone who disagrees and puts up a reasonable reason why they disagree with you be accused of trolling and ignored?

And you still haven't answered my questions.

 

You've made a couple of false statements about things I've said. Until you prove them or retract them you're a troll.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...